Your comment is a poorly disguised insult.
Your comment is a poorly disguised insult.
In either case, they're both almost a Cult of personality. The fans are so adorant of their object that they often overlook glaringly evil deeds. At the same time, the level of manipulation exhibited and the devotion demanded by the personality is extreme to the point that outsiders see it as absurd.
Idk, maybe it's just me but I find fanaticism to be very off putting in general. When the idol asks fans to make sacrifices to stay it in their favor, that's when it crosses a line into creepy.
Disney walks a fine line where it expertly cultivates that culture while simultaneously pretending it doesn't exist and remaining open and accessible to everyone.
This verges on the tautological though, given that "fan" is short for "fanatic"; you're complaining that fanatics are fanatics. Well... yeah, but so? I don't think you can directly impute the behavior of the fans on to the target of their fandom. (You can draw some indirect conclusions, but it involves at least a few steps of lower reliability and propositions people will find debatable.)
Eh, that's its (probable) origin, but I'd say the two have diverged in meaning; "fan" nowadays doesn't have the same connotation of extreme and uncritical zeal of "fanatic."
Disney has been accused of gross labor and environmental violations across the globe. So while R. Kelly has caused severe damage to a few, Disney has caused minor to moderate damage to a great number.
I'm not stating that a fan of a franchise, like Marvel Comics, specifically is accepting of Disney's scope of misdeeds or even considering them a Disney fan in this case. I'm speaking directly to the Disney fan, those people who specifically travel to Disney parks multiple times a year, go on the cruises repeated, and consume the Disney branded merchandise in volume.
Then maybe companies and enterprises shouldn't do all they can to be treated like men...
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/corporations-are-people-a_b_5...